Welcome to 1984 - 21st Century Style

So this is the world in which we live. Historians who have spent their lives studying a very important part of world history are harassed, threatened and arrested simply because of what their findings showed them - that the official history is flawed, possibly even fabricated.

I am talking about the history of WWII and the holocaust of course. We all learned about it in history class throughout our education in our government run schools. But what if most of or all of what we were taught wasn't really how it all happened? Remember, the history of conflict is written by the winners - not the losers.

This is where these historians come into the picture. What they are saying publicly to anyone who will listen is that what we know about the holocaust is wrong. That what we have all been taught for around 60 years could be wrong.

I'm not going to get into whether or not these historians are wrong or right. I am more interested in the fact that their arguments are dismissed out of hand as simply anti-Semitic. Rather than refute their version of WWII and holocaust history with evidence, the mainstream would rather attack their character.

Why do they attack the persons character rather than refute what these people say using a valid argument?

When people claim that the moon landing never happened are they arrested and deported to countries with "thought crime" laws? No. When people claim to have been abducted by aliens are they arrested and charged? No. How about those who believe Elvis is alive?

Then why this type of treatment for those who question the official version of the holocaust? It is the reaction of the mainstream with regards to these people that makes me think there is more to this. Truth needs no law to support it. For some reason though, this "truth" does.

Ernst Zundell is one of the people who has spent his life studying WWII and the Jewish holocaust. He used his website and leaflets to get his version of this history out to the average person, and was arrested and deported from both the U.S. and Canada for it. Canada declared him a threat to national security and deported him to his homeland of Germany, where he faces a prison sentence simply for questioning the holocaust. It is a crime in Germany to deny the official version of the holocaust.

I didn't realize that simply questioning historical record made you a threat to the security of Canada. I know I certainly don't feel threatened.

David Irving is another historian who was arrested recently in Vienna Austria. He was there by invitation to speak to a University Association in the Austrian capital. His topics were secret negotiations between Adolf Eichman and Jewish leaders in Budapest and the 'trucks for Jews' deal. He was not allowed to speak and could face up to 20 years in proson - all for questioning the extent of the holocaust.

Germar Rudolph, a chemist, was recently deported from the U.S. to Germany where he was wanted for 'inciting racial hatred by disputing the deaths of thousands of Jews held captive at a concentration camp.'

This is a scientist who tested bricks in the gas chambers for traces of Zyklon B, a cyanide compound reportedly used to kill Jews during the Holocaust. His tests found no traces of this chemical. He therefore disputed the official story that Jews were gassed to death in this particular camp...Auschwitz.

No matter what you think you know about Auschwitz, you cannot be certain no matter what - you weren't there. We have an accepted version of events, and a growing group of people with evidence to support an alternate version.

The only conclusion any open minded individual can come to is that new evidence is being completely ignored based on character assassinations of those who bring it forward. This new evidence is never disputed with facts.

I wonder if the world is unfolding as George Orwell wrote in 1984 because of his book, or if he just had insight into where the world would end up if we kept a false history of our time here.

All I know is that on one side we have people who present evidence to support their side of the argument, and on the other side we have people that attack their character rather than refute the evidence presented with some of their own.

I will tend to believe that they cannot refute that evidence, and instead rely on me ignoring it as hate speech. I believe that the more they try to silence these "thought criminals", the more they make it obvious that they are trying to hide something.

Over the past few decades the 'official' number of Jews murdered by Hitler has dropped from around 6 million to 4 million, and more recently an accepted 1.5 million. I mention this only because the record is slowly being corrected...so why are they locking up people who only want to correct it further? What truth are they trying to hide that is worth taking these mens freedoms from them?

Some quotes relevant to this post :

The truth is "hate speech" only to those who have something to hide.--Michael Rivero

In this world, those who seek the truth will also find trouble. --Gary Amirault

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. --Arthur Schopenhauer

When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.-- Dresden James

Those Who Benefit Are The Most Likely Perps

We see this logic used in crime dramas on TV all the time. Why does the media completely ignore this type of logic and instead reprint the official government line almost word-for-word without question? Why do most of us, as consumers of 'news' accept these reprinted government releases without question, even if they don't make sense?

The official story behind the most recent 'suicide' bombings that took place in Amman Jordan on November 9th, 2005 is another case that should have logic applied to it. Those who have been blamed for the attacks are those who's cause is hurt the most.

Not only that, but the story has changed repeatedly, taking it from 'bombs in the ceiling with Israelis evacuated beforehand' (a la Netanyahu before the London attacks) to suicide bombers from the Iraqi resistance, led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the apparent leader of "al Qaida in Iraq".

This photo from the Grand Hyatt Hotel shows clearly that the blast came from above the damaged ceiling - not below. Also, this seems to be the only damaged part of the ceiling, indicating that this is the area in which the bomb detonated.

If the bomb were strapped to a person who was blown to pieces you would expect some blood splatter on the white wall in the background - there is none.

How can these two pieces of evidence be ignored, unless the story is that the 'suicide' bomber walked in and climbed up above the false ceiling of a very crowded room before triggering the device.

How about the witness accounts about power going out only in the area of the bombing seconds before it occurred? That part is disappearing from coverage slowly.

These three pieces of evidence should make any sensible and intelligent person question the official story, because these facts contradict the official story.

In the best case, the mainstream media is a bunch of complete idiots to not see the holes in the story; but in the more likely scenario, editorial boards in Western media outlets are choosing the Western side in the 'Global War on Terrorism', even though available evidence says Western governments are lying through their teeth regularly, and should at least be held somewhat suspect.

Their story changes and evidence slowly disappears from public airing as the mainstream press and the governments get the facts to fit their "official" story. No matter who the evidence in a crime points to, it is obviously in our interests to pursue all leads - even if it leads back to those claiming to be the victims.

So we go back to the main question any investigator asks after a crime...who benefits? Does the Iraqi resistance benefit? How could they benefit from attacking fellow Arabs who are likely to sympathize with their situation in occupied Iraq? They don't - which makes them the least likely suspect.

I'm not gonna tell you what to believe or who to blame, because if you aren't intelligent enough to figure it out for yourself you won't believe me anyway. However here is some more to chew on :

- U.S. and Israeli intelligence has been implicated in other terror attacks against Western interests, as well as the assassination of Rafik Hariri in Lebanon.

- Israeli Intelligence, known as MOSSAD has been implicated in many false flag operations over the years, including the Lavon Affair and the attack on the USS Liberty.

- the apparent leader of 'al Qaida in Iraq' - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi who has claimed responsibility for this (and many other) 'suicide' attacks is apparently dead...see here and here. Oh yeah, and so is Osama(5th paragraph down).

- a U.S. Army study says this about Mossad : "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act."